On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 11:41:04AM +0900, Myunguk Kim wrote:
> ISR_RXFO means "Status of Data Overrun interrupt for the RX channel"
> according to the datasheet.
>
> So, the comment should be RX, not TX
Thanks for better description!
The patch title though, I'd like to write it as "ASoC: dwc: correct ISR_RXFO
check comment".
>
> Signed-off-by: Myunguk Kim <mwkim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> sound/soc/dwc/dwc-i2s.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/sound/soc/dwc/dwc-i2s.c b/sound/soc/dwc/dwc-i2s.c
> index 22c004179214..c71c17ef961d 100644
> --- a/sound/soc/dwc/dwc-i2s.c
> +++ b/sound/soc/dwc/dwc-i2s.c
> @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ static irqreturn_t i2s_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
> irq_valid = true;
> }
>
> - /* Error Handling: TX */
> + /* Error Handling: RX */
> if (isr[i] & ISR_RXFO)
> { dev_err_ratelimited(dev->dev, "RX overrun (ch_id=%d)\n", i);
> irq_valid = true;
In any case,
Reviewed-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx>
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
